That looks good to me, thanks! Ben.
> On Nov 12, 2017, at 11:07 PM, John Strassner <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Ben, > > thank you for performing this review. All of your issues will be addressed > in version 9 of this I-D, to be released on Monday 11/13. > > Please note that I will change RFC2119 boilerplate to RFC8174 > boilerplate. Specifically: > > old text: > > The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", > "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this > document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. > > In this document, these words will appear with that interpretation > only when in ALL CAPS. Lower case uses of these words are not to be > interpreted as carrying RFC-2119 significance. > > Note: as this is an informational document, no RFC-2119 key words > are used. > > new text: > > The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", > "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and > "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in > BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all > capitals, as shown here. > > Note: as this is an informational document, no normative [RFC2119] > [RFC8174] key words are used. > > > Dear Kathleen, > > thank you for providing clarification and direction for addressing Ben's > comments. In particular, > > the old bullet was: > o Closed environments, where there is only one administrative > domain. Less restrictive access control and simpler validation > can be used inside the domain because of the protected nature of > a closed environment. > > the new bullet will be > > o Closed environments, where there is only one administrative > domain. Such environments provide a more **isolated** > environment, but still communicate over the same set of I2NSF > interfaces present in open environments (see above). Hence, the > security control and access requirements for closed environments > are the same as those for open environments. > > > regards, > John > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Kathleen Moriarty > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Oct 24, 2017, at 11:08 PM, Ben Campbell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework-08: No Objection > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2nsf-framework/ > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > COMMENT: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > -2: If no 2119 keywords are used, please remove the boilerplate. But if you > > do > > need to keep it, please use the updated boilerplate from 8174, since there > > are > > a number of lower case versions of 2119 keywords. > > > > Thanks, I have been catching this, but must have missed it in this draft. > > > -6.2: first bullet: I am always worried about text advising that "closed > > environments" have lower security requirements. That has proven false so > > many > > times we really shouldn't be encouraging it. This is especially worrisome > > since > > the first paragraph of section 11 talks about the importance of > > "trustworthy, > > robust, and fully secured access". > > Yes, good catch. Was 'isolated' the intent here? If so, that's fine to > assume a higher level of trust, but unlikely to be using I2NSF. > > Thanks, > Kathleen > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > I2nsf mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf > > _______________________________________________ > I2nsf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf > > > > -- > regards, > John
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ I2nsf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
